Legal Ghost Writing
A Quiet Threat to Transparency in England’s Courts?
“Legal ghost writing” is the practice of lawyers drafting documents for clients who then present them in court as self-represented litigants. This practice has probably always been in existence, but with the rise of the use of AI, it appears to be gaining even more traction.
However, beneath its surface appeal lies a troubling erosion of transparency, accountability, and professional integrity.
Unlike formal representation, ghostwriting allows lawyers to remain invisible. They can craft pleadings, letters, and submissions, but the client appears to the court to act alone. This concealment is not a technicality. It misleads the court, distorts the adversarial process, and may even undermine the principle that justice must not only be done, but be seen to be done.
The rise of ghostwriting is often framed as a pragmatic response to the collapse of legal aid. But necessity does not justify opacity.
When courts receive documents that bear the hallmarks of professional drafting, precise legal language, structured argumentation, strategic framing, they are entitled to know who authored them. Without disclosure, judges may wrongly assume the litigant understands and owns the arguments presented. This can affect how cases are managed, how evidence is tested, and how justice is delivered.
Ghostwriting also sidesteps professional accountability.
If a document contains misleading claims, procedural errors, or inappropriate tone (as is frequently shown when people use AI to help draft court documents), the ghostwriter is shielded from scrutiny. The court cannot question them, opposing parties cannot challenge them, and regulatory bodies cannot assess their conduct. The litigant may not even fully understand the contents of the document to which they have put their name. This lack of visibility is not a feature, it is a flaw.
No.53 understands self-representing litigants need help, and we provide unbundled services, so we can offer services such as document review, document preparation, completing applications for court and so forth, however we take instructions for you to undertake this work, and if it is a document that requires submission to court, then it will include that the document was drafted by us.
We also offer accessible legal guidance through services such as our “Ask A Question” page, and can do fixed fee pricing on some of our services.
We do not promote ghostwriting as a model, so if a client asks us to ‘add some legal knowledge or caselaw’ to their documents, this is not something we will do without full instructions. This is because you, the litigant, has to fully understand the legal argument, and be able to argue your point in court. If you’re not going to instruct a lawyer to represent you, then it is better for your documents to be written in plain English, with no ‘legalese’. A judge will understand that a litigant won’t have the same skills as a lawyer, and won’t have the same expectations of you as they do of a lawyer.
Our aim at No.53, with our unbundled services is an emphasis on clarity, fairness, and direct engagement. To conflate our approach with ghostwriting would only lead to misrepresenting our ethos. We will explain all the above to you if you choose to use our unbundled services. All responsible law firms need to recognise that legal support must be transparent, not covert, and at No.53 we do.
The legal profession needs to address the rise in ghostwriting by asking:
These are not just academic questions. They go to the heart of public trust in the justice system. If legal ghostwriting (especially AI led ghostwriting) continues to grow unchecked, it risks turning the courtroom into a stage where the real authors remain behind the curtain.
Need legal guidance, or document prep? Check out our unbundled services here.